Jeffy

OK so they released the CLK63 AMG and its rated at 481 HP. BTW - The same 6.3L AMG motor released in more expensive models (like the CLS63) is rated at 515hp. Anyway, the CLK and C AMG models usually get the same AMG powerplant and rating so logic would say that the C63 is going to be 481hp, more than 100hp more than the current C55! Damn... Can you imagine what it will cost just to keep tires on that thing?

-Jeff

BabyBenz6spd

Besides improving the engine, I hope they have a better transmission that goes with the engine. Like SMG or DSG or something

Wonder what kind of MPG does it get

rlee02135

its a beast!
i bet it will cost at least 70 grand

knepster

it will never happen, where do you get this info? The 6.3 will be detuned if it ever makes the 2008 c class, and it will be 420-430 hp

Jeffy

Info on the CLK63 at 481hp was from Road and Track magazine who attended the some show in Chigaco where they said MB released the info. So maybe R&T got it wrong (doubt it), but the 6.3 is indeed a 500hp engine so the reporting seems right on. As an aside, sources from within Daimler Chrysler say there will be twin-turbo versions of the AMG 6.3L making 600hp (or more). Like I said, the CLK and C have historically received the same AMG powerplant and tune and the CLK is detuned to 481hp. I can understand if you are still in the denial stage...

-Jeff

Jakpro1

Can you imagine if it was a simple Kleemann ECU tune or exhaust issue that brought her back up to 515.....the CLK would officially be....THE DEVIL.

ultraseven

it won't happen for a while, and for the love of God when are they going to put in an actual LSD?

patrick_y

I agree, I wished Mercedes would develop a SMG or DSG type transmission. But it has to be smooth. A 6.3 liter will probably get around 15/22 mpg.

I'm still somewhat skeptical that the car will have 481 hp. That seems silly. It will not cost $70k though. That I'm quite sure of. They may have a more expensive C63 that will compete with the Audi RS4 that will cost in that neighborhood, but not the base C63 that will compete with the S4.

Oh, tires, well, if I ever got this car, I might want to consider trying on those Kumho tires since they're inexpensive. This is of course assuming that BF Goodrich (the best, cheap, and good handling tire) doesn't make it in the desired size.

e harmon

What history are we talking about exactly? In the thus far short life of the "CLK" (starting in 1998 in the US, afaik), I can think of ~2 years in which the AMG versions of the concurrently offered C Class and CLK shared an engine, namely the current 55s. Am I missing something?

Don't get me wrong; I think it would be great if they offered the 63 engine in the C Class (and it seems likely) but I don't follow this reasoning.

Regards,

e harmon

patrick_y

Hmm, that's true too. Also, the CLK often gets these 500 series engines, the C Class doesn't. It is possible that the C will not get the same engine the CLK engine is going to get this time.

14cue

i would kill for that car/ but i would settle for c55.

e harmon

Wouldn't it be interesting if the next C AMG used a tuned version of the 550 engine from the CLK550, similar to how the C43 used a tuned 430 engine? This is, of course, wild speculation. Based on the specs of the standard 550, and the likely lower curb weight of the C versus the CLK, this would probably make a really nice car.

Regards,

e harmon

patrick_y

While that would be very interesting and worthwhile and more exclusive (from a collector's point of view) for the C Class to have its own AMG engine like it did in the past (W202 series), I don't think it'll entirely happen. Mainly because they want to cut costs and build just one block.

But it'd be definitely very special for the C Class to have an engine all to itself. In Europe, they have a special AMG tuned diesel engine for the C Class. Seriously. For the W203 chassis. They had it at one point, not sure if they still have it.

e harmon

The C43 engine is arguably mildly modified version of the M113 used in the CLK, S, and ML, and calling it unique to the C43 would be a stretch. The C36 before it was a much different story, and many would submit that the C43 became more "mainstream"--and used the same block--for the reasons you describe.

Cost cutting would only be one part of the equation in profitability, with market segmentation--leading to revenue opportunities--being another. A *hypothetical* new and improved C55 (or whatever it would be called), based on the 550 engine, might fit the marketing strategy better than a C63, and result in increased profit expectations even if the tooling cost was incrementally higher.

Since the E63 will be naturally aspirated, establishing "marketing space" between it and a C63 would be much more difficult than between the current C55 and E55. Sure, you could detune the engine artificially, but then you would face potential dissapointment among the potential C Class buyers who would like their cake and the opportunity to eat it as well: "What do you mean we don't get the same horespower? Where did it go?"

If 420hp is the detuning target for a 63 engine, how far out of reach is that from the base 550 as a tune-up target? The C43's engine is rated at 302hp versus the 275hp in the CLK430. What is the CLK550 rated at, 382? 400 is but a sneeze from there. Of course you have the torque curve and other more subtle things to consider, but it's a fair bet that the HP number is the one that will be in the spotlight.

Of course, this is all still just shooting the breeze, but hey.

Regards,

e harmon

MoMocedes230

Your going crazy over the 63? Just give me a C55 and I will be fine.

patrick_y

Oh well. Whatever goes, goes.

Still, seriously though, 6.3 liters in a C Class. Am I the only person who's thinking this is a bit too much? Even the S600 doesn't have 6 liters (has turbos though). I'm starting to think this is a bit overkill.

patrick_y

I agree C55 is already more than fine. It's just dandy. When you get to the 63 level, that starts to get a bit... unethical.

white_w203

thats gonna be one fast matha phucker, but also one great gas guzzler. my coworker has the pontiac GTO and i think it has a 6.0 engine and it eats gas like crazy.

gaiex

The only differences are the headers sizes because of the space in the engine compartment, sayed by a AMG tech on a car magazine...

Trekman

ClK 63 or the C63 would be my next car!!!!

sdsilverm3

I'd be happy if AMG just shoved the current 55 Kompressor motors in the new C. Either the 469hp or 493 hp version would suffice.